RELENG_6: Which scheduler for SMP?

I've never had any success with the ULE scheduler on my dual Athlon box running RELENG_5; it was so unstable it made Windows 3.1 look stable. In fact my current build, cvsup'd a couple of days ago, won't even boot with ULE.

From what I remember, ULE was intended to become the default scheduler during the life of 5.0 but that hasn't happened.

I've just cvsup'd the source for RELENG_6 and I'm surprised to find in the GENERIC config file:

#options    SCHED_ULE	# ULE scheduler
options     SCHED_4BSD	# 4BSD scheduler

so it seems 4BSD is still the default scheduler. Is ULE _still_ considered to be in development/experimental? Even the SMP config file doesn't use ULE.

Also in GENERIC:

options     PREEMPTION	# Enable kernel thread preemption

[....]

options     ADAPTIVE_GIANT  # Giant mutex is adaptive.

Yet in src/sys/conf/NOTES, ADAPTIVE_GIANT is listed under SMP Options and PREEMPTION is listed under SMP Debugging Options which makes it surprising that they are in the GENERIC config file.

What I am trying to decide is whether there any point in making the jump from a very stable RELENG_5 system to RELENG_6. AIUI the ULE scheduler and it's associated options optimize the use of multiple CPUs and by staying with 4BSD I'm not getting the best performance from my system.

Can anyone offer any advice on this please?

The machine has dual Athlon MP2800s on a Asus A7M266-D mobo, 1Gbyte ECC RAM and all SCSI disks and optical drives.

TIA.

Regards,

Mark
_______________________________________________
freebsd-stable@xxxxxxxxxxx mailing list
http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-stable
To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-stable-unsubscribe@xxxxxxxxxxx"

Relevant Pages

  • Re: HEADS UP: ULE off in 5.3
    ... On Mon, 25 Oct 2004, Scott Long wrote: ... > turn out that the submitter is using the ULE scheduler. ... the features that gave ULE higher throughput on some SMP boxes are now ...
    (freebsd-current)
  • Re: When will SCHED_ULE be back?
    ... >> fact it made SMP unusable for me with the ULE scheduler because of ... it wasn't julian who turned it ... those involved) doesn't change the fact that ULE was broken for most ... >> wildly over the past year or so, which is how the ULE situation ...
    (comp.unix.bsd.freebsd.misc)
  • HEADS-UP: ULE scheduler coming to 8.0-CURRENT soon...
    ... I think it's fairly common knowledge by now but... ... The ULE scheduler is ... decided that ULE "just barely missed the bus". ... To that end either Jeff or I will be switching the default scheduler in ...
    (freebsd-current)
  • Re: cvs commit: src/sys/kern sched_ule.c (fwd)
    ... Jeff Roberson's list of bugs in ULE: ... > and this problem isn't exhibited with the ULE scheduler. ... > script was causing the 5.3-RELEASE GENERIC kernel to panic, ...
    (freebsd-current)
  • Re: RELENG_6: Which scheduler for SMP?
    ... ULE was intended to become the default scheduler during the life of 5.0 but that hasn't happened. ... and PREEMPTION is listed under SMP Debugging Options which makes it surprising that they are in the GENERIC config file. ... I have been benchmarking a Java servlet under ULE, and I couldn't get result scores as high under ULE as I could under the regular the 4BSD and when I left the machine benchmarking all night under ULE I came back in the morning to find the machine unresponsive and in need of a hard reboot. ...
    (freebsd-stable)